Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964944AbXAJSZZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:25:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964994AbXAJSZY (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:25:24 -0500 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:60120 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964944AbXAJSZY (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:25:24 -0500 X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de Message-ID: <45A52F86.8090003@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:25:10 +0100 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061202 SeaMonkey/1.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Robert P. J. Day" CC: "linux-os (Dick Johnson)" , Linux kernel mailing list Subject: Re: macros: "do-while" versus "({ })" and a compile-time error References: <45A3D1DF.4020205@s5r6.in-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 742 Lines: 23 Robert P. J. Day wrote: [...] > what the above implies is > that the ALIGN() macro can *never* be extended in that way because of > the way it's being used in the struct definition above, outside of a > function. > > doesn't that place an unnecessarily limit on what might be done with > ALIGN() in the future? [...] The one occurrence which is different from others could be changed. But more importantly: Don't overuse macros. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== ---= -=-=- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/